November 11, 2008

"A Target Doesn't Really Go With This Dress, Daddy."

Peter Bodo with an interesting look at the end of the year and, I think, fair assessment of Baby E.

I thought this was great:

On the men's side, the tennis year is like a tight, well-plotted movie
that suddenly gets bogged down in a seemingly interminable ending that
introduces a variety of new themes and characters - yet we all know
that there won't be a last-minute plot twist to
significantly re-shape our view of 2008.

Heh. So true.

As for the ladies:

The women are done, so what does Doha tell us? Among other things,
that the changing of a guard in tennis isn't always as cleanly
orchestrated and crisply executed as it is at, say, Buckingham Palace.
I saw a lot of rifles dropped, hats flying, and women bumping into each
other as they tried to follow the choreography. In the late stages, I
found myself thinking a lot about Venus Williams. When the dust finally
settled, my thoughts turned to Ana Ivanovic.

Overall, the message seems to be that 2009 is up for grabs: Discount
either Williams sister at your peril, Jelena Jankovic still hasn't
summited at a Grand Slam event, and Ana Ivanovic leaves more questions
asked than answered because of the way she finished the year. And then
there's (presumably) healthy and eager Maria Sharapova. But while
Jankovic was the firm thread that ran through most of the year,
Ivanovic is a more interesting case. I think she's bumped her head on
the ceiling of the game and she's well on her way to coming up against
something Pete Sampras had to deal with back around 1992, and described
this way:

If you want to get to be no. 1 and stay no. 1, you have to get
used to living with that target on your back. That's a big decision,
because you can have a good life in the Top 10 - eat in the best
restaurants, play golf on the best courses in the world, make a lot of
money, go deep at tournaments maybe even win a major now and then. . .
all without dealing with a whole lot of pressure.Basically, you can
hide and have a very good life. The other way is to look at that top
ranking and say, "I want this, and I want to hold onto it for all I'm
worth, and I'm willing to take the pressure and make all the sacrifices
and live my life with that target on my back."

Okay, let's remember that Pete Sampras didn't have that conversation
with himself six or seven months after his breakout win at the US Open
of 1990. For a good two years, Sampras treaded water, tried to deal
with his new notoriety and an improved lifestyle, and wasn't at all
convinced that he wanted to don that garment with the bullseye sewn on
the back. Slowly, though, he took stock of himself, he took stock of
the competition, he took stock of expectations - his own, and those of
the world-at-large. Only after that period of drift did he realize that
he needed to have that conversation with himself, because he finally
understood, firsthand, what was at stake and the issues in play.
Deciding that it was worth living with a target on his back was his
personal Rubicon, and it shaped the rest of his career. He accepted the
garment, and in so doing he laid the foundation for the glories that
ensued.

A parallel between Pete Sampras and Ana Ivanovic only goes so far,
partly because of the tremendous difference between men's and women's
tennis. And let's face it, even on her best day, Ivanovic isn't clearly
superior to any number of her rivals in any number of key areas that
can determine success or failure. In fact, for her to become a player
as dominant as, say, Justine Henin, will demand an extraordinary
competitive appetite. It will also take Spartan discipline (something
she seems willing to adopt) and unwavering focus.

But other players with less than dazzling physical attributes (a la
Venus Williams) or skills (Justine Henin) have taken on those burdens
and flourished. In fact, Ivanovic is a present-day version of one of
them, Chris Evert. The parallels between them are striking. Both of
them are conservative personalities who conformed to the "traditional"
model - it's an extraordinary comment on what might be called a general
globalization that Ivanovic emerged from Serbia (via Switzerland) so,
well, smoothly finished, and seemingly in touch with the mainstream tennis gestalt.

As well, Ivanovic's game is economical, precise, and clean in the
same way that Evert's was, and she compensates for a lack of power or
explosive ability with good anticipation a shrewd grasp of strategy.
Evert showed how far steady nerves, the ability to produce her best
shots under the most withering pressure, and recognizing her own
strengths and weaknesses can take a player. It's the same territory
Ivanovic will have to work, and up until the second half of the year,
she did the job well.

Pete goes on to compare and contrast Ana to Chris Evert, which is really interesting. Then he concludes with this:

So I'm willing to adopt a wait-and-see attitude, and believe that at
this stage it's easier to underestimate Ivanovic than to overrate her.
She's the forgotten player of 2008. Her late-season swoon certainly
exposed some chinks in the mental armor. Injuries also played a part in
her unraveling, and I was a little surprised by that. After spending
some time with Ivanovic and her team in the late winter, I felt that
her approach was extremely professional and surprisingly geared to the
long term (she seemed to devote more time to general fitness and
strengthening regimens than to short-term technical or strategic
objectives). I think that approach will pay off in the long term,
because mental and emotional stability lie at the end of the road for
the physically disciplined.

Comments

"A Target Doesn't Really Go With This Dress, Daddy."

Peter Bodo with an interesting look at the end of the year and, I think, fair assessment of Baby E.

I thought this was great:

On the men's side, the tennis year is like a tight, well-plotted movie
that suddenly gets bogged down in a seemingly interminable ending that
introduces a variety of new themes and characters - yet we all know
that there won't be a last-minute plot twist to
significantly re-shape our view of 2008.

Heh. So true.

As for the ladies:

The women are done, so what does Doha tell us? Among other things,
that the changing of a guard in tennis isn't always as cleanly
orchestrated and crisply executed as it is at, say, Buckingham Palace.
I saw a lot of rifles dropped, hats flying, and women bumping into each
other as they tried to follow the choreography. In the late stages, I
found myself thinking a lot about Venus Williams. When the dust finally
settled, my thoughts turned to Ana Ivanovic.

Overall, the message seems to be that 2009 is up for grabs: Discount
either Williams sister at your peril, Jelena Jankovic still hasn't
summited at a Grand Slam event, and Ana Ivanovic leaves more questions
asked than answered because of the way she finished the year. And then
there's (presumably) healthy and eager Maria Sharapova. But while
Jankovic was the firm thread that ran through most of the year,
Ivanovic is a more interesting case. I think she's bumped her head on
the ceiling of the game and she's well on her way to coming up against
something Pete Sampras had to deal with back around 1992, and described
this way:

If you want to get to be no. 1 and stay no. 1, you have to get
used to living with that target on your back. That's a big decision,
because you can have a good life in the Top 10 - eat in the best
restaurants, play golf on the best courses in the world, make a lot of
money, go deep at tournaments maybe even win a major now and then. . .
all without dealing with a whole lot of pressure.Basically, you can
hide and have a very good life. The other way is to look at that top
ranking and say, "I want this, and I want to hold onto it for all I'm
worth, and I'm willing to take the pressure and make all the sacrifices
and live my life with that target on my back."

Okay, let's remember that Pete Sampras didn't have that conversation
with himself six or seven months after his breakout win at the US Open
of 1990. For a good two years, Sampras treaded water, tried to deal
with his new notoriety and an improved lifestyle, and wasn't at all
convinced that he wanted to don that garment with the bullseye sewn on
the back. Slowly, though, he took stock of himself, he took stock of
the competition, he took stock of expectations - his own, and those of
the world-at-large. Only after that period of drift did he realize that
he needed to have that conversation with himself, because he finally
understood, firsthand, what was at stake and the issues in play.
Deciding that it was worth living with a target on his back was his
personal Rubicon, and it shaped the rest of his career. He accepted the
garment, and in so doing he laid the foundation for the glories that
ensued.

A parallel between Pete Sampras and Ana Ivanovic only goes so far,
partly because of the tremendous difference between men's and women's
tennis. And let's face it, even on her best day, Ivanovic isn't clearly
superior to any number of her rivals in any number of key areas that
can determine success or failure. In fact, for her to become a player
as dominant as, say, Justine Henin, will demand an extraordinary
competitive appetite. It will also take Spartan discipline (something
she seems willing to adopt) and unwavering focus.

But other players with less than dazzling physical attributes (a la
Venus Williams) or skills (Justine Henin) have taken on those burdens
and flourished. In fact, Ivanovic is a present-day version of one of
them, Chris Evert. The parallels between them are striking. Both of
them are conservative personalities who conformed to the "traditional"
model - it's an extraordinary comment on what might be called a general
globalization that Ivanovic emerged from Serbia (via Switzerland) so,
well, smoothly finished, and seemingly in touch with the mainstream tennis gestalt.

As well, Ivanovic's game is economical, precise, and clean in the
same way that Evert's was, and she compensates for a lack of power or
explosive ability with good anticipation a shrewd grasp of strategy.
Evert showed how far steady nerves, the ability to produce her best
shots under the most withering pressure, and recognizing her own
strengths and weaknesses can take a player. It's the same territory
Ivanovic will have to work, and up until the second half of the year,
she did the job well.

Pete goes on to compare and contrast Ana to Chris Evert, which is really interesting. Then he concludes with this:

So I'm willing to adopt a wait-and-see attitude, and believe that at
this stage it's easier to underestimate Ivanovic than to overrate her.
She's the forgotten player of 2008. Her late-season swoon certainly
exposed some chinks in the mental armor. Injuries also played a part in
her unraveling, and I was a little surprised by that. After spending
some time with Ivanovic and her team in the late winter, I felt that
her approach was extremely professional and surprisingly geared to the
long term (she seemed to devote more time to general fitness and
strengthening regimens than to short-term technical or strategic
objectives). I think that approach will pay off in the long term,
because mental and emotional stability lie at the end of the road for
the physically disciplined.